Worst recovery ever?

[sd'sker]

If the 'job creators' really wanted to fix the economy (they don't, they might as well all be named Nero) they could, and do it almost over night. Its really this simple. The tops of the companies cut their pay way back and spread that money out as raises to the employees of the same company. Direct money injection to people who will go out and spend money, raise demand for goods and services and actually make their companies more successful. But it won't happen. The greedy bastards are more interested in their own personal wealth and the world be damned.

 

We would be better off if most to all companies ran like the NFL....

we would be better without shareholders and the managerial class. if factories and businesses were ran democratically (or at least with the employees in mind) some revenue would be determined to go to a trust that would be used in times of economic downturn to keep on employees even though they are a burden to a company. that way recessions would be softened because less consumers (real job-creators) would be able to keep their jobs. layoffs only compound the problems because then less people have money to spend, other sectors are hurt causing more layoffs, and the cycle continues. our whole economy and tax systems needs to be overhauled with jobs and employees as the main concern.

 

but capitalism (as it is now) is just crazy. every indicator of health is based on growth, even though we live on a finite planet with a negative birth-rate (when excluding immigrants).

[strigori]

If the 'job creators' really wanted to fix the economy (they don't, they might as well all be named Nero) they could, and do it almost over night. Its really this simple. The tops of the companies cut their pay way back and spread that money out as raises to the employees of the same company. Direct money injection to people who will go out and spend money, raise demand for goods and services and actually make their companies more successful. But it won't happen. The greedy bastards are more interested in their own personal wealth and the world be damned.

 

We would be better off if most to all companies ran like the NFL....

we would be better without shareholders and the managerial class. if factories and businesses were ran democratically (or at least with the employees in mind) some revenue would be determined to go to a trust that would be used in times of economic downturn to keep on employees even though they are a burden to a company. that way recessions would be softened because less consumers (real job-creators) would be able to keep their jobs. layoffs only compound the problems because then less people have money to spend, other sectors are hurt causing more layoffs, and the cycle continues. our whole economy and tax systems needs to be overhauled with jobs and employees as the main concern.

 

but capitalism (as it is now) is just crazy. every indicator of health is based on growth, even though we live on a finite planet with a negative birth-rate (when excluding immigrants).

There are a handful of companies that do operate like that. Valve comes to might right away.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303379204577474953586383604.html

[carlfense]

Back to the gist of the topic; Economic recovery or rather the lack thereof.

 

***SNIP***

Excluding cases of pent-up demand brought about by war (particuarly World War II) historically the economy performs "well" when there is sufficient disposable income for the middle class. In short, when there is significant (not merely lip-service) tax cuts for the middle class. In every case in which the so-called "job creators" (a spiffy term for the wealthy) gained tax cuts, there was no net positive effect on the economy. Why? Easy - the discretionary spending of the wealthy is generally unaffected by economic downturns - they continue to have disposable income.

 

Job creation doesn't come from tax cuts to "job creators" - job creation occurs when a business sees an uptick in demand. That demand is almost ALWAYS due to the middle class - and that occurs only when they have enough money to spend beyond the necessities of living. If you look at "good" economic times, they involve a combination of tax increases to the wealthy and tax cuts to the middle class. That brings in more revenue for the government to pay down debt, and increases demand for goods. That, in turns, causes businesses to hire to meet increased demand, which in turn leads to more people with jobs and, eventually, more disposable income.

 

To date, no significant tax break has been made for the middle class (attempted, but thwarted) while taxes for the wealthy continue to be abnormally low based on historical levels.

+1